Category: Nursing

Based on the video, provide your ethical position. Explain by applying an ethical principle

YouTube: Based on video, explain what Utilitarianism consists in, discuss the downside of Utilitarianism.

http://youtu.be/O1ZV1kyLkgI—

Research Critique Guidelines

To write a critical appraisal that demonstrates comprehension of the research study conducted, address each component below for qualitative study in the Topic 2 assignment and the quantitative study in the Topic 3 assignment.

Successful completion of this assignment requires that you provide a rationale, include examples, or reference content from the study in your responses.

Qualitative Study

Background of Study:

Identify the clinical problem and research problem that led to the study. What was not known about the clinical problem that, if understood, could be used to improve health care delivery or patient outcomes? This gap in knowledge is the research problem.

How did the author establish the significance of the study? In other words, why should the reader care about this study? Look for statements about human suffering, costs of treatment, or the number of people affected by the clinical problem.

Identify the purpose of the study. An author may clearly state the purpose of the study or may describe the purpose as the study goals, objectives, or aims.

List research questions that the study was designed to answer. If the author does not explicitly provide the questions, attempt to infer the questions from the answers.

Were the purpose and research questions related to the problem?

Method of Study:

Were qualitative methods appropriate to answer the research questions?

Did the author identify a specific perspective from which the study was developed? If so, what was it?

Did the author cite quantitative and qualitative studies relevant to the focus of the study? What other types of literature did the author include?

Are the references current? For qualitative studies, the author may have included studies older than the 5-year limit typically used for quantitative studies. Findings of older qualitative studies may be relevant to a qualitative study.

Did the author evaluate or indicate the weaknesses of the available studies?

Did the literature review include adequate information to build a logical argument?

When a researcher uses the grounded theory method of qualitative inquiry, the researcher may develop a framework or diagram as part of the findings of the study. Was a framework developed from the study findings?

 

Results of Study

What were the study findings?

What are the implications to nursing?

Explain how the findings contribute to nursing knowledge/science. Would this impact practice, education, administration, or all areas of nursing?

 

Ethical Considerations

Was the study approved by an Institutional Review Board?

Was patient privacy protected?

Were there ethical considerations regarding the treatment or lack of?

Conclusion

Emphasize the importance and congruity of the thesis statement.

Provide a logical wrap-up to bring the appraisal to completion and to leave a lasting impression and take-away points useful in nursing practice.

Incorporate a critical appraisal and a brief analysis of the utility and applicability of the findings to nursing practice.

Integrate a summary of the knowledge learned.

 

 

 

Quantitative Study

Background of Study:

Identify the clinical problem and research problem that led to the study. What was not known about the clinical problem that, if understood, could be used to improve health care delivery or patient outcomes? This gap in knowledge is the research problem.

How did the author establish the significance of the study? In other words, why should the reader care about this study? Look for statements about human suffering, costs of treatment, or the number of people affected by the clinical problem.

Identify the purpose of the study. An author may clearly state the purpose of the study or may describe the purpose as the study goals, objectives, or aims.

List research questions that the study was designed to answer. If the author does not explicitly provide the questions, attempt to infer the questions from the answers.

Were the purpose and research questions related to the problem?

Methods of Study

Identify the benefits and risks of participation addressed by the authors. Were there benefits or risks the authors do not identify?

Was informed consent obtained from the subjects or participants?

Did it seem that the subjects participated voluntarily in the study?

Was institutional review board approval obtained from the agency in which the study was conducted?

Are the major variables (independent and dependent variables) identified and defined? What were these variables?

How were data collected in this study?

What rationale did the author provide for using this data collection method?

Identify the time period for data collection of the study.

Describe the sequence of data collection events for a participant.

Describe the data management and analysis methods used in the study.

Did the author discuss how the rigor of the process was assured? For example, does the author describe maintaining a paper trail of critical decisions that were made during the analysis of the data? Was statistical software used to ensure accuracy of the analysis?

What measures were used to minimize the effects of researcher bias (their experiences and perspectives)? For example, did two researchers independently analyze the data and compare their analyses?

Results of Study

What is the researcher’s interpretation of findings?

Are the findings valid or an accurate reflection of reality? Do you have confidence in the findings?

What limitations of the study were identified by researchers?

Was there a coherent logic to the presentation of findings?

What implications do the findings have for nursing practice? For example, can the findings of the study be applied to general nursing practice, to a specific population, or to a specific area of nursing?

What suggestions are made for further studies?

Ethical Considerations

Was the study approved by an Institutional Review Board?

Was patient privacy protected?

Were there ethical considerations regarding the treatment or lack of?

Conclusion

Emphasize the importance and congruity of the thesis statement.

Provide a logical wrap-up to bring the appraisal to completion and to leave a lasting impression and take-away points useful in nursing practice.

Incorporate a critical appraisal and a brief analysis of the utility and applicability of the findings to nursing practice.

Integrate a summary of the knowledge learned.

Reference

Burns, N., & Grove, S. (2011).
Understanding nursing research
(5th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.

This assingment is a follow up to research previously done, which includes a critique of the Qualative research articles used for that assingment( if approved to do assingment reserach articles wil be provided to you). This assingments details are listed on the “assingment requirements” page. Also attached is a guideline (research critique guidleines)as to how the paper should be laid out, This is assingment is due Monday 11/6/2017, and does require to be turned into “Turnitin” 20 percent or less similarity is required. Please be advised that this is a nursing research assignment.

 

Assignment requirements

Use the practice problem and a qualitative, peer-reviewed research article you identified in the Topic 1 assignment to complete this assignment.

In a 1000-1,250 word essay, summarize the study, explain the ways in which the findings might be used in nursing practice, and address ethical considerations associated with the conduct of the study.

Refer to the resource “Research Critique Guidelines” for suggested headings and content for your paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center

Interview a person in a formal position of leadership within your organization (e.g., a supervisor, a manager, a director). Begin your interview with the following questions:

What is your role as a health care team member?

How do you define professionalism and how does professional responsibility influence your work?

Do you consider yourself a steward of health care? Why or Why not?

Is it important to you that leaders exercise professional advocacy and authenticity as well as power and influence when working with colleagues? Why or why not?

In 500-750 words, summarize your interview and share your impressions of the leader’s responses.

Compare and contrast responses provided by your peer (in Professional Identity and Stewardship – Part I: Peer Interview assignment) with those provided by the leader. Share your impressions of their differences and similarities.

Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.

What is your role as a health care team member?

How do you define professionalism and how does professional responsibility influence your work?

Do you consider leaders in your organization stewards of health care? Why or Why not?

Is it important to you that leaders exercise professional advocacy and authenticity as well as power and influence when working with colleagues? Why or why not?

The ethos of scientism and postmodernism

This is a discussion post, about 250 words, tittle page not require In- text citation is required original work please, reference source.

QUESTION

The ethos of scientism and postmodernism has exacerbated the perceived philosophical and cultural tension between science and religion. What is your perception of this tension? Use the lecture and the topic readings to support your response.(Read the Introduction and Chapter 1 from
Bioethics: A Primer for Christians)

Importance of evidence based practice

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER NOW

we are discussing the importance of evidence based practice! As such, there are a variety of sources you can use to conduct successful interventions that ensure positive patient outcomes. What are some of the costs and benefits to using these particular sources? and discussing the importance of incorporating research/evidence based practice into our own nursing practice. In the course of their practice, nurses ask many questions, and not all of them can or should be answered by a search for best evidence.  Carper (1978) suggests that nurses employ at least four ways of knowing in patient care: moral, aesthetic, personal and empiric. I’d like you all to discuss ideas related to at least two of these types of “knowing” (Carper, 1978).

looking for asap each question in one page

Worldview Foundations of Spirituality and Ethics Essay

Introduction

There has been an increase of interest in the role of spirituality in health care, as well as in the workplace and other fields in general. This interest has been met with a variety of responses, including an uneasiness that has historical roots. There is generally a perceived tension between science and religion/spirituality. This estrangement between the worlds of science and religion is in some ways not truly reflective of some inherent incompatibility between science and religion per se, but rather a reflection of underlying worldview tensions. The rediscovery of spirituality and its implications for health care provides recognition that the estrangement between the two worlds has not served patients’ best interests. If this is the case, then part of the task of serving patients well will require some basic worldview training in order to not only understand patients’ own backgrounds more clearly, but to also promote the fruitful interaction of science and religion in the health care setting more generally.

Spirituality and Worldview

The theoretical and practical foundations of any discipline or field take place within the wider framework of what is known as a worldview. A “worldview” is a term that describes a complete way of viewing the world around you. For example, consider religion and/or culture. For many people, their religion or culture colors the way in which they view their entire reality; nothing is untouched by it and everything is within its scope. Yet one need not be religious to have a worldview; atheism or agnosticism are also worldviews. Thus, all of one’s fundamental beliefs, practices, and relationships are seen through the lens of a worldview. The foundations of medicine and health care in general bring with it a myriad of assumptions about the very sorts of questions answered in a person’s worldview. Consider carefully the seven questions in the Called to Care textbook in order to begin grasping more clearly the concept of a worldview.

A Challenging Ethos

A fundamental thesis of this course is that two sorts of underlying philosophies or beliefs about the nature of knowledge, namely, scientism and relativism, are at the heart of this perceived tension between science and religion. Moreover, scientism and relativism help explain to some degree why this tension has not served the best interests of patients, and is even at odds with the fundamental goals of medicine and care.

Scientism is the belief that the best or only way to have any knowledge of reality is by means of the sciences (Moreland and Craig, 2003, pp. 346-350). At first glance this might sound like a noncontroversial or even commonsensical claim. However, think about this carefully. One way to state this is to say that if something is not known scientifically then it is not known at all. In other words, the only way to hold true beliefs about anything is to know them scientifically. Relativism on the other hand is the view that there is no such thing as truth in the commonsensical sense of that concept. Every claim about the nature of reality is simply relative to either an individual or a society/culture. Thus, according to this way of thinking, it might be true here in the United States that equality is a good thing, but in some Middle Eastern countries it is simply not a concern. Yet there is no ultimate truth of the matter, it is simply a matter of individual or popular opinion. In some way, truth is just what an individual or a culture decides that it is, and therefore not truly discovered, but invented.

The current context of health care and medicine in the West is defined by an ethos (the prevailing attitudes and beliefs of a culture) of scientism and relativism. This ethos has exacerbated the perceived philosophical and cultural tension between science and religion. The result has been a general relativizing and caricaturing of religion, and the elevation of science as the default epistemology for all things rational or even true.

While scientism may seem commonsensical or rational at first glance, a closer examination reveals glaring weaknesses. It should be noted right from the outset that scientism is not equivalent to science. This is because scientism is a philosophy about the nature and limits of science as well as the extent of human knowledge. Scientism is a philosophical thesis that claims that science is the only methodology to gain knowledge; every other claim to knowledge is either mere opinion or false.

One of the most pressing dilemmas for scientism is science’s inability to make moral or ethical judgments. To understand why, consider the nature of scientific claims and their distinction from moral or ethical judgments. General scientific claims can be described simply as the attempt to make descriptions of fact. But when people make moral or ethical judgments, they do not simply make statements of fact (though that is part of it), but are evaluating those fact claims. Thus when making a moral judgment people are evaluating whether some fact is good or bad. Thus consider the distinction between the following statements:

(1) 90% of Americans believe that racism is wrong.

(2) Racism is wrong.

Statement (1) is a statement of fact in the sense that it is meant to describe the way things actually are, or what is the case. Statement (2) however, makes a judgment; it makes a normative claim in the sense that it is making a claim about what ought to be the case. Statement (2) is not simply reporting or describing the facts. It is saying that it is not the way it is supposed to be. In recognizing these differences, a crucial distinction has surfaced between (1) scientific claims and (2) moral and ethical claims. Scientific claims are limited to statements of description; they are solely claims about what is the case. Moral and ethical statements are prescriptive and are evaluative claims about what ought to be the case. This has been described as the fact-value distinction to designate the difference between facts and values, values being a prescription of the way things ought to be, the moral evaluation of facts. This distinction has also been described as the “is” (fact) versus “ought” (value) distinction.

Thus, because science deals with mere facts, it is not in a position to say anything about what ought to be the case. Science is relevant to moral and ethical claims in interesting ways, but prescriptive statements about what morally ought to be the case are simply beyond the bounds of science. To try to derive what ought to be the case only from what is the case is a logical fallacy. If one were to look at the world and the way things are, and then claim that it simply follows that it is the way it ought to be does not match the experience of morality. There are many events that are the case and describe what is (genocide, war, hatred, murder), but whether or not they ought to be that way is a further question that science is not in a position to answer. Thus to try to derive an ought from an is refers to what is called the fallacy of deriving of ought from an is.  Much more could be said of the inadequacy of scientism, but it should be noted that moral, ethical, and religious claims all involve normative claims about the way the world ought to be. One practical effect within health care has been the subtle but pervasive view that religion is a harmless tangent to medicine and health care at best, and a superstitious and destructive distraction at worst.

Recently there has been a resurgence and appreciation of spirituality within medicine in more holistic approaches to health care. For example, the Center for Spirituality, Theology and Health at Duke University was established in 1998 for the purpose of

conducting research, training others to conduct research, and promoting scholarly field-building activities related to religion, spirituality, and health. The Center serves as a clearinghouse for information on this topic, and seeks to support and encourage dialogue between researchers, clinicians, theologians, clergy, and others interested in the intersection.

(Center for Spirituality, 2014, para. 1)

While a welcome corrective, it is easy to inadvertently buy into weaker forms of scientism and fail to appreciate the particularity of each religion by reducing all religion to a generic spirituality. For example, Burkhardt (1999) attempts to defend a generic definition of the term “spirituality” (p. 71), but Shelly and Miller (2006) point out the inadequacy of such a strategy. It is not fair or respectful to paint all religions or worldviews with the same brush under the heading of spirituality and ignore the differences.

Thus, in the interest of philosophical clarity, religious sensitivity, and genuine care, this section will introduce fundamental concepts and challenge the contemporary ethos to make room for genuine religious dialogue.

The Foundations of Christian Spirituality in Healthcare

In stark contrast to this ethos is the Christian tradition and the resources it provides for a rich conception of care. Contra scientism and relativism, the foundations of Christian spirituality in health care, includes two attitudes/theses: (1) an acknowledgement of science as a subset of knowledge in general, and a deep appreciation for science as a collective human enterprise that reflects the knowability and order of creation; and (2) the goodness and worth of this creation (in so far as it reflects God’s creative intention) with human beings bearing special dignity and intrinsic worth, reflected in the well-known bioethical principle of “respect for persons” (National Commission, 1979).

The foundations of Christian spirituality in health care assume genuine knowledge of God and his purposes. Central to this foundation are the biblical Christian narrative and the person of Jesus Christ. In order to appreciate and do justice to this center, the ethos of scientism and postmodernism must be first challenged and dispelled.

This first topic of this course is devoted to understanding the concept of worldview in detail and to begin to challenge the philosophies of relativism and scientism. It will also begin to lay the foundations of a broadly holistic understanding of the relationship between spirituality and health care in general, and a Christian worldview for health care in general.

References

Burkhardt, M. (1989). Spirituality: An analysis of the concept holistic nursing practice. New York, NY: Aspen Publishers, Inc.

Center for Spirituality, Theology and Health. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.spiritualityandhealth.duke.edu/

Moreland, J.P., & Craig, W.L. (2003). Philosophial foundations for a Christian worldview. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979). The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html

Shelly, J. A., & Miller, A. B. (2006). Called to care: A Christian worldview for nursing (2nd ed.). Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Define health belief model

Using the health belief model, how can nurses encourage patients to make immediate and permanent behavior changes; particularly as they relate to lifestyle choices?

In this assignment, you will identify the various threats to the validity of a proposed research topic.

Select a topic related to public health care from the following:

Health disparities: Chronic diseases

Environmental health

Impact of infectious diseases on public health

Using the South University Online Library or the Internet, conduct a literature review on your chosen topic. Based on your review, create a 3- to 4-page Microsoft Word document that includes:

A list of topic that you have selected and provide a rationale for your choice.

At least three specific research questions (hypotheses) on which your research proposal will be based.

The research method for your research proposal. Your research method should explain how you intend to obtain your results, including information on the type of research and sampling plan.

The different types of threats to validity and a brief explanation of the threats that are appropriate for your research design.

Specify strategies for minimizing the identified threats to validity.

A project plan with a detailed equipment list.

Support your responses with examples.

Cite any sources in APA format.

Submission Details

Name your document SU_PHE3025_W4_A2_LastName_FirstInitial.doc.

Submit your document to the
W4 Assignment 2 Dropbox
by
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
.

Assignment 2 Grading Criteria Maximum Points
Listed the topic selected and provided a rationale for choice.5Provided at least three specific research questions (hypotheses) on which research proposal will be based.10Explained the research method for research proposal. The research method should explain how you intend to obtain your results, including information on the type of research and sampling plan.10Explained the different types of threats to validity and a brief explanation of the threats that are appropriate for your research design.10Specified strategies for minimizing the identified threats to validity.5Created a project plan with a detailed equipment list.5Us